Well I hope they don't turn the tiers males into emasculated drows and if they do hopefully their is a choice to bring back the patriarchy
I take it you're not into the dominatrix fetish.
What exactly about Kyros empire is Evil?
- Thread starter Kadajko
- Start date
-
We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
I take it you're not into the dominatrix fetish.
Things evil Empire will do:
- Starts wars against others
- Put former serfdom peasants into slavery
- Anihilete cities and destroy the crops (edicts)
- Use arbitrary law enforces who would kill you just to keep things easier
- Dont really care about quality of life of people
- The war is only on borders not inside empire, total numbers of wars is similar to multi state situation.
- Promotes borderless society with free trade
- Ranks of Kyros are rather open to lowborn, The whole Scarlet Chorus is like mix of Bonobos and Killer Whales.
- No sex, race distrimination
- Support new branches of industry
- Better education for mages and loremasters (again not limited to nobles)
- Renovation of antic architecture (Towers of Doom)
- No sacrifize in the name of no-existing Gods (already better than Aztecs)
- No Cultural supremacy on conquered land (already better than Europeans)
- No public execution (better than Christian Monarchies)
Last edited:
- 10
- 1
Depends on the circumstances and the person, but usually I like to be in charge..
It's actually something that happened in various real cultures; the idea basically being that women need some sort of home to raise children; so only daughters would inherit the homes of their mothers - why would men care? They don't need some fancy building around them, they're tough after all ... besides, once they got their wife they can just move in with her. Doesn't necessarily mean those societies were matriarchal, either.
I don't know any majors civilizations that had a large impact on the world that did this so what cultures are you talking about?
Never claimed it there was any world conquering society around that was run like that. Just a bunch of smaller/mostly tribal cultures cultures around the globe. There were some in India and China, and some in Africa and South America. dunno about others, and I'm not digging out their names for no reason. ^^;
For me it's all about it making sense I don't really have a problem if the society is matriarchal as long as it makes sense for example that the men were cursed so that they are far less ambitious or the society is based on magical ability and women have stronger magical abilities. It's all about making sense and making it fell organic and giving the player the possibility to change the system.
- 3
- 1
The justification for landholding women makes plenty of sense to me and while not strictly the same thing ancient egypt has matrilinial inheritence, which is why so many pharoahs married their sisters. You can always be sure who the mother is, the father on the other hand. I can imagine such a system would have worked well in such times. Men could go forth and seek their fortunes and *ahem* spread their seed, while the women remained with the land to adminsiter, rule and tend to communities.
The *evil* of Kyros empire is the evil of force marching the world into a new age, with ruthless determination and merciless pity for those that would be unable to adapt.
As Knotz said, when evil wins.... it generally settles down to the business of everyday life and becomes a whole lot less evil but perhaps, just as practical and ruthless. The scarlet chorus, wouldn't have much value in the post conquest world i suspect. Best to think of Tyranny as the bit before the transition from diabolical expansionist empire to ruthless bureaucratic administators, with our hand guiding the direction that governance will take in the tiers. I really don;t think it will be evil when you get right down to as evil is a naive and childish notion, imo
- 4
- 1
On the topic of matriachy you should bear the Beasts in mind. Females are stronger, bigger and more aggressive - so they rule. Pretty cool.
It will be interesting to see the reasoning behind only women owning land in the Tiers. Men were, and have always been, bigger and stronger - so why would they have relinquished control?
I don't know anything about ancient Egypt, but that was an interesting tidbit, if nothing else; but not particularly relevant here.
Slaves exist in this world, probably also in the Tiers. If men can't own land, there would be no reason to own slaves to cultivate such. I don't know if we are looking at a feudal society, but even if we aren't, owning land is a substantial income.
It will be interesting to see the reasoning behind only women owning land in the Tiers. Men were, and have always been, bigger and stronger - so why would they have relinquished control?
I don't know anything about ancient Egypt, but that was an interesting tidbit, if nothing else; but not particularly relevant here.
Slaves exist in this world, probably also in the Tiers. If men can't own land, there would be no reason to own slaves to cultivate such. I don't know if we are looking at a feudal society, but even if we aren't, owning land is a substantial income.
I think Egyptian inter-sibling-marriage, so that men could still lay claim to the throne, may have been a big indicator as to why matrilenial inheriance wasn't was more prevalent through history. Sure sexism played a major role and I'm not trying to justify or trivialise that sexism, but I suspect it was a factor, but then I'm an uneducated nobody!
Men have always been more prone to moving about, women historically had a need to establish some roots for more successful child bearing and rearing. Not because that was their place, but simply out of practicality. When you have to carry a child for 9 months, then rear that child for some time after, just made it more practical for men to be on the move, hunting and trading, while women handled the matters of everyday life that accomodated a less ambling existance. I could readily envision a culture that grew with these practicalities in mind and a scoiety evolving from such, with women holding power of established agrarian and later metropolitan land, while men were encouraged to take wing and roam about. Such a society would have been fairly workable, women would have a vested interest in developing their lands, homesteads and ensuring good rule for the proliferation of the species, while men expanded inlfuence, retrieved much needed resources and guarded against rival incursion or aggression (or instigated it!) Not to suggest that there wouldn't be men who fancied themselves builders, rulers or administrators or women that fancied themselves explorers, traders or warriors, but from the a position of practicallity, the kind of which, we as modern people don't really understand, it would make a huge amount of sense. Others might disagree but thats just my thoughts.
I disagree about the slavery bit too, slaves could be taken by roaving men (as was often the case) and sent back to work land, perfom menial labour and generally be slaves. I doubt women would have given much thought to the right or wrong of slavery, if it meant their sons and daughters and the wider community who relied upon them as leaders, would have full bellies during winter and warm homes from the frosts. Especially if slavery was an everyday practice (as it once was)
EDIT: Terrible, terrible grammar, I seem to get worse with time.
- 1
.png){kind=avatar}
Its not the we-all-love-eachother-the-king-is-our-saviour-black-and-white-blabla-empire
Its a rather realistic, archaic empire ie allows for some cruel things - like a many d&d-kingdoms (old red wizards eg).
Its a rather realistic, archaic empire ie allows for some cruel things - like a many d&d-kingdoms (old red wizards eg).
.png){kind=avatar}
Anyone who thinks Kyros's empire is somehow not evil REALLY needs to go watch one of those youtube videos or twitch streams that covers character creation. Specifically the part about setting up your own "conquest". The fact that it is called Conquest to begin with is pretty telling on it's own. But you got to do everything from "kill people to make an example", "forcibly enslave the prisoners", "praise the archon for going on a rampage, and destroying half a country", to "goad the ruler into a duel so you can kill them and gain glory".
Those aren't the actions of a benevolent nation come to save you from anarchy. The very first quest in the game is to go dump an edict on rebels (which kills all of them ideally) and your opening coversation option gives you the chance to let your soldiers know they will succeed or die. Very friendly.
Also for all this nonsense about Women only ruling in the Tiers... I think you guys sort of made each others points. Yes, there were societies where only women could rule in history, no none of them came out to be huge dominant societies. What are we doing in the Tiers again? Oh yeah, wiping out their society and taking it over for the faceless Kyros who I am pretty sure is more of a "might makes right" ruler and doesn't care what sex you are. Sounds a lot like what happened to those types of societies in the real world.
Those aren't the actions of a benevolent nation come to save you from anarchy. The very first quest in the game is to go dump an edict on rebels (which kills all of them ideally) and your opening coversation option gives you the chance to let your soldiers know they will succeed or die. Very friendly.
Also for all this nonsense about Women only ruling in the Tiers... I think you guys sort of made each others points. Yes, there were societies where only women could rule in history, no none of them came out to be huge dominant societies. What are we doing in the Tiers again? Oh yeah, wiping out their society and taking it over for the faceless Kyros who I am pretty sure is more of a "might makes right" ruler and doesn't care what sex you are. Sounds a lot like what happened to those types of societies in the real world.
- 2
- 1
.png){kind=avatar}
Obsidian made New Vegas, and Kyros and his/her/it's empire sounds extremely similar to Caesar's Legion. Everyone is a slave and they all live to serve the head of the state, and if you aren't useful, you're sentenced to death, and they've got some really nasty ways of killing folk.
Poor and misunderstood Kyros being judged by arbitrary 2016 standards. He's lovable in a Temujin sort of way.
- 9
I don't really see the similarity. On the surface perhaps. While Kyros empire (from what we have seen so far) is certainly ruthless and brutal, it seems geared more towards meritocratic principles than Caesars Legion. Much of it's structure seems to be about creating a level playing field from which those that can, do rise up, so long as they recognise the superiority and authority of Kyros and his/her laws. Caesars Legion was more about control. Brutality for brutalities sake. While everybody is a subject of and subject to Kyros, Kyros seems to place a considerable amount of emphasis on law. Caesars legion didn't really have that. Atleast in my opinion. I never really played the Legion with any real enthusiasm as, as a faction, it just seemed too unstable and destined to implode sooner or later as it didn't really have any significant underlying principles.
The fact Kyros and the immediate lieutenants are seemingly ageless, could be responsible. They introduce a element of stability and continuum the legion could never hope to match and Caesar himself was prone to fear of losing his position, which drove his actions and choices. Kyros doesn't seem to suffer that same problem.
- 5
- 1
Kyros is literally a 2016 evil dictator with some magical superpowers (*coughWMDscough*). If he was judged by medieval standards he would still be despised and hated by everyone, and absolutely considered evil. If for no other reason then at least because he is an atheist.
- 3
- 1
But thats by real world standards. We don't relly know what kinds of faiths exist in Terratus, if any and whether possessing no faith would be considered evil. Plus we are talking about a bronze age society in which, death is always just around the corner. by medieval standards, bronze age life and rule probably seemed barbaric and cruel. Let alone by our modern standards. No doubt five hundred years from now, some folks will be sitting around thinking into a thought diffuser, how terribly evil and backwards we are (or were)
- 3
I would so much more readily discuss terms with Kyros's forces than with Caesar's it's not even funny.
- 4
You aren't a slave. Your life just belongs to Kyros. You are free to live and work as you will, and get paid for that work.
Exactly. Until you decide you would rather do different work, or maybe have different rulers, or get some more freedoms than you have. Then you find out exactly how altruistic Kyros is. Protip, Kyros isn't very altruistic.
Society where you are free, as long as you only do and think what I say, is not a society based on freedom but oppression. It is kind of scary how many people on this forum seem to think Kyros's government "isn't that bad".
I think of Kyros's government as Russia under Stalin. Yes comrade, fight for mother Russia and her people! Comrade Commisar is here to spread the good word! Also he is here to shoot you in the back if you should think fleeing from a tank regiment when you are half starving and only have small arms is reasonable.
- 4
- 3